CIT v. Chinna Constructions

286 ITR 479High Court2006#15542 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing CIT v. Chinna Constructions

D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S Teenlok Advisory Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1351/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri N.V. Vasudevan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…nt of which he was otherwise entitled under the contract and which payment has been delayed as a result of certain disputes between them. The Ld. A/R has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Koshika Telecom Ltd. [2006] 286 ITR 479 (Del) wherein it has been held that "where the income in the nature of interest flows from deposits made by the assessee which deposits are in turn inextricably linked to the business of the assessee, the income derived on such deposits cannot be treated as income from other sources. Therefore, income from interest on deposit was business income…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S International Stones India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…part of business income as considered in AYs 2005-06 to 2010-11 and not to be treated as income from other sources. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- a) CIT v. Chinna Constructions (2006) 297 ITR 70 (Kar) b) CIT v. Koshika Telecom Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 479 (Del) c) ACIT v. Allied Construction (2007) 106 TTJ 616 (Del Trib.) 42. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that interest received from bank was not connected with the business of the undertaking of the assessee. Relying on the decisions of K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 669 (Ker) and MKR Frozen Food Expert v. ITO (2010) 126 ITD 1…

M/S International Stone India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…part of business income as considered in AYs 2005-06 to 2010-11 and not to be treated as income from other sources. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- a) CIT v. Chinna Constructions (2006) 297 ITR 70 (Kar) b) CIT v. Koshika Telecom Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 479 (Del) c) ACIT v. Allied Construction (2007) 106 TTJ 616 (Del Trib.) 42. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that interest received from bank was not connected with the business of the undertaking of the assessee. Relying on the decisions of K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 669 (Ker) and MKR Frozen Food Expert v. ITO (2010) 126 ITD 1…

M/S International Stones I P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1475/BANG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…part of business income as considered in AYs 2005-06 to 2010-11 and not to be treated as income from other sources. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- a) CIT v. Chinna Constructions (2006) 297 ITR 70 (Kar) b) CIT v. Koshika Telecom Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 479 (Del) c) ACIT v. Allied Construction (2007) 106 TTJ 616 (Del Trib.) 42. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that interest received from bank was not connected with the business of the undertaking of the assessee. Relying on the decisions of K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 669 (Ker) and MKR Frozen Food Expert v. ITO (2010) 126 ITD 1…

M/S |Nternational Stones I P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1474/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…part of business income as considered in AYs 2005-06 to 2010-11 and not to be treated as income from other sources. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- a) CIT v. Chinna Constructions (2006) 297 ITR 70 (Kar) b) CIT v. Koshika Telecom Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 479 (Del) c) ACIT v. Allied Construction (2007) 106 TTJ 616 (Del Trib.) 42. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that interest received from bank was not connected with the business of the undertaking of the assessee. Relying on the decisions of K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 669 (Ker) and MKR Frozen Food Expert v. ITO (2010) 126 ITD 1…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S International Stones India P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1332/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…part of business income as considered in AYs 2005-06 to 2010-11 and not to be treated as income from other sources. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- a) CIT v. Chinna Constructions (2006) 297 ITR 70 (Kar) b) CIT v. Koshika Telecom Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 479 (Del) c) ACIT v. Allied Construction (2007) 106 TTJ 616 (Del Trib.) 42. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that interest received from bank was not connected with the business of the undertaking of the assessee. Relying on the decisions of K. Ravindramatham Nair v. Dy. CIT (2003) 262 ITR 669 (Ker) and MKR Frozen Food Expert v. ITO (2010) 126 ITD 1…

CIT v. Chinna Constructions (286 ITR 479) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax